IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea91/271259.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating the Precision of Welfare Measures

Author

Listed:
  • Kling, Catherine L.

Abstract

Three methods for constructing standard errors of welfare estimates have been employed in the recreation demand literature: a Taylor's series approximation, the bootstrap, and a method proposed by Krinsky and Robb. This paper presents the results of a simulation experiment designed to examine the accuracy of these methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Kling, Catherine L., 1991. "Estimating the Precision of Welfare Measures," 1991 Annual Meeting, August 4-7, Manhattan, Kansas 271259, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea91:271259
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.271259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/271259/files/aaea-1991-086.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/271259/files/aaea-1991-086.pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.271259?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey H. Dorfman & Catherine L. Kling & Richard J. Sexton, 1990. "Confidence Intervals for Elasticities and Flexibilities: Reevaluating the Ratios of Normals Case," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(4), pages 1006-1017.
    2. Green, Richard & Hahn, William & Rocke, David, 1987. "Standard Errors for Elasticities: A Comparison of Bootstrap and Asymptotic Standard Errors," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 5(1), pages 145-149, January.
    3. Catherine L. Kling & Richard J. Sexton, 1990. "Bootstrapping in Applied Welfare Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 406-418.
    4. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    5. Dorfman, Jeffrey H. & Kling, Catherine L. & Sexton, Richard J., 1990. "Confidence Intervals for Elasticities and Flexibilities," 1990 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Vancouver, Canada 270866, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Torres, Cati & Hanley, Nick & Riera, Antoni, 2011. "How wrong can you be? Implications of incorrect utility function specification for welfare measurement in choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 111-121, July.
    2. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    3. Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Nick Hanley & Antoni Riera Font, 2008. "The implications of incorrect utility function specification for welfare measurement in choice experiments," CRE Working Papers (Documents de treball del CRE) 2008/6, Centre de Recerca Econòmica (UIB ·"Sa Nostra").
    4. Timothy C. Haab, "undated". "A Utility Based Repeated Discrete Choice Model of Consumer Demand," Working Papers 9611, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    5. J. Paul Combs & Rickey C. Kirkpatrick & Jason F. Shogren & Joseph A. Herriges, 1993. "Matching Grants and Public Goods: a Closed-Ended Contingent Valuation Experiment," Public Finance Review, , vol. 21(2), pages 178-195, April.
    6. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840, August.
    7. Carson, Richard T. & Czajkowski, Mikołaj, 2019. "A new baseline model for estimating willingness to pay from discrete choice models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 57-61.
    8. Cooper, Joseph C., 1995. "The Application of Nonmarket Valuation Techniques to Agricultural Issues," Staff Reports 333359, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    9. Christiana E. Hilmer & Matthew T. Holt & Richard C. Bishop, 2010. "Bootstrapping Your Fish or Fishing for Bootstraps? Precision of Welfare Loss Estimates from a Globally Concave Inverse Demand Model of Commercial Fish Landings in the U.S. Great Lakes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(1), pages 98-112.
    10. Moore, Rebecca & Bishop, Richard C. & Provencher, Bill & Champ, Patricia A., 2009. "Accounting for Respondent Uncertainty to Improve Willingness-to-Pay Estimates," Staff Papers 92233, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    11. Rebecca Moore & Richard C. Bishop & Bill Provencher & Patricia A. Champ, 2010. "Accounting for Respondent Uncertainty to Improve Willingness‐to‐Pay Estimates," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 58(3), pages 381-401, September.
    12. Larson, Douglas & Lew, Daniel & Loomis, John, 1999. "Are Revealed Preference Measures of Quality Change Benefits Statistically Significant?," Western Region Archives 321712, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    13. Kataria, Mitesh, 2009. "Willingness to pay for environmental improvements in hydropower regulated rivers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 69-76, January.
    14. Poe, Gregory L. & Giraud, Kelly L. & Loomis, John B., 2001. "Simple Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference of Empirical Distributions: Application to Internal and External Scope Tests in Contingent Valuation," Staff Papers 121130, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    15. Poe, Gregory L. & Lossin, Eric K. & Welsh, Michael P., 1992. "A Convolutions Approach to Measuring the Differences in Benefit Estimates from Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Studies," Staff Papers 200545, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    16. Joseph Cooper & John Loomis, 1993. "Testing whether waterfowl hunting benefits increase with greater water deliveries to wetlands," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(6), pages 545-561, December.
    17. Eggert, Håkan & Olsson, Björn, 2004. "Heterogeneous preferences for marine amenities: A choice experiment applied to water quality," Working Papers in Economics 126, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    18. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Liljenstolpe, Carolina, 2003. "Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 95-103, November.
    19. David S. Bullock & Klaus Salhofer & Jukka Kola, 1999. "The Normative Analysis of Agricultural Policy: A General Framework and Review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(3), pages 512-535, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nicholas E. Piggott, 2003. "Measures of precision for estimated welfare effects for producers from generic advertising," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(3), pages 379-391.
    2. Bullock, David S. & Salhofer, Klaus, 2003. "Judging agricultural policies: a survey," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 225-243, May.
    3. Caffey, Rex H. & Kazmierczak, Richard F., Jr., 1994. "Factors Influencing Technology Adoption In A Louisiana Aquaculture System," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-11, July.
    4. Carson, Richard T. & Czajkowski, Mikołaj, 2019. "A new baseline model for estimating willingness to pay from discrete choice models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 57-61.
    5. Johnston, Robert J. & Swallow, Stephen K. & Weaver, Thomas F., 1999. "Estimating Willingness to Pay and Resource Tradeoffs with Different Payment Mechanisms: An Evaluation of a Funding Guarantee for Watershed Management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 97-120, July.
    6. Joseph Cooper & John Loomis, 1993. "Testing whether waterfowl hunting benefits increase with greater water deliveries to wetlands," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 3(6), pages 545-561, December.
    7. J. G. Hirschberg, J. N. Lye & D. J. Slottje, 2008. "Confidence Intervals for Estimates of Elasticities," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1053, The University of Melbourne.
    8. Hirschberg, J.G. & Lye, J.N. & Slottje, D.J., 2008. "Inferential methods for elasticity estimates," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 299-315, December.
    9. Poe, Gregory L. & Lossin, Eric K. & Welsh, Michael P., 1992. "A Convolutions Approach to Measuring the Differences in Benefit Estimates from Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Studies," Staff Papers 200545, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    10. Poe, Gregory L. & Giraud, Kelly L. & Loomis, John B., 2001. "Simple Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference of Empirical Distributions: Application to Internal and External Scope Tests in Contingent Valuation," Staff Papers 121130, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    11. Kim, Jae H. & Fraser, Iain & Hyndman, Rob J., 2011. "Improved interval estimation of long run response from a dynamic linear model: A highest density region approach," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(8), pages 2477-2489, August.
    12. John M. Antle & Roberto O. Valdivia, 2006. "Modelling the supply of ecosystem services from agriculture: a minimum‐data approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(1), pages 1-15, March.
    13. Metin Cakir & Joseph V. Balagtas, 2010. "Econometric evidence of cross-market effects of generic dairy advertising," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(1), pages 83-99.
    14. Mooney, Sian & Antle, John M. & Capalbo, Susan Marie & Paustian, Keith H., 2003. "Incorporating Uncertainty In Integrated Assessment Modeling," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22225, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Nguyen, Duong T.M. & McLaren, Keith Robert & Zhao, Xueyan, 2008. "Multi-Output Broadacre Agricultural Production: Estimating A Cost Function Using Quasi-Micro Farm Level Data From Australia," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6009, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Joshua P. Berning & Hayley H. Chouinard & Jill J. McCluskey, 2009. "Measuring the Impact of Nutrition Labels on Food Purchasing Decisions: A field experiment with scanner data," Food Marketing Policy Center Research Reports 117, University of Connecticut, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    17. Samiul Haque & Kenneth A. Foster & Roman Keeney & Kathryn A. Boys & Badri G. Narayanan, 2019. "Output and input bias effects of U.S. direct payments," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 229-236, March.
    18. Cooper, Joseph C., 1995. "The Application of Nonmarket Valuation Techniques to Agricultural Issues," Staff Reports 333359, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    19. Mike Christie & Christopher D. Azevedo, 2009. "Testing the Consistency Between Standard Contingent Valuation, Repeated Contingent Valuation and Choice Experiments," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 154-170, February.
    20. Ward, Patrick & Shively, Gerald, 2012. "Vulnerability, Income Growth and Climate Change," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 916-927.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea91:271259. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.aaea.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.